General Discussion
Related: Editorials & Other Articles, Issue Forums, Alliance Forums, Region Forums“If we’d had 9/11 with the Democrats as president, they’d be still blaming us like you never forget"
Bill Maher and Hardball host Chris Matthews both slammed Jeb Bush on Fridays Real Time for arguing during the last GOP debate that his brother, George W. Bush, kept us safe, seemingly downplaying the 9/11 attacks.
I remember one day he didnt, Maher said.
Former New York Gov. George Pataki who is campaigning against Jeb Bush called the criticism unfair, saying George W. Bush had been president for about eight months at the time of the attacks.
.................
Matthews countered by bringing up former Secretary of State Hillary Clinton and Republicans insistence on blaming her for the death of Ambassador Christopher Stevens and three other Americans in Benghazi.
If wed had 9/11 with the Democrats as president, theyd be still blaming us like you never forget it, Matthews said. Theyre still mad about four people dead somewhere in Libya imagine if the Democrats had 3,000 people killed under our watch. Theyd be dead right now.
MORE plus VIDEO:
http://www.rawstory.com/2015/09/maher-and-matthews-rip-jeb-bush-if-911-had-happened-under-gore-gop-would-remind-us-non-stop/
BeyondGeography
(39,370 posts)They would be happily shameless about it.
malaise
(268,955 posts)He tore them a new one
napkinz
(17,199 posts)HassleCat
(6,409 posts)If Benghazi... excuse me... BENGHAZI! is Clinton's fault, then Bush is definitely responsible for the 9/11 attacks.
Hortensis
(58,785 posts)over every phony issue needed to distract their voters from real needs. For sure they'd still be spending vast sums of money and filling in long hours over 9/11 right up to today.
chapdrum
(930 posts)They are not interested in the actual nuts and bolts; just what they can scavenge from what they've gutted.
Even their hero Raygun (actually) stated in a speech: "What are the nine words you should be most afraid of?
I'm from the government, and I'm here to help."
Full marks for candor, though.
Same for Dick C., who, when asked to comment (on ABC national news, by Martha Raddatz) on the occasion
of the death of the 4,000th U.S. soldier in the Middle East, responded "So?"
Hortensis
(58,785 posts)of 330 million people will run much better without government nuts and bolts, except military. Without interference by government, a "natural order" will prevail.
That ideology is behind almost everything they do. But it takes a nut to look at the world and NOT recognize that the only nations on this planet run that way are what used to be called "third-world."
MinM
(2,650 posts)The meme/myth being that Republicans are better on issues of Defense and National Security. Of course there are other things at play here to but that at least in part explains why Dubya always gets a pass on 9/11. Because the GOP is better at this stuff.
Chris Matthews, although dead right in this instance, has been one of many in the press that has perpetuated the myth. Many liberals buy into the myth too. While promoting his Iron Man movie filmmaker Jon Favreau said something to the effect that in spite of his political leanings he was glad that a Republican was in charge during 9/11.
ChisolmTrailDem
(9,463 posts)greenman3610
(3,947 posts)that's after being shamed to do so, the first proposal was for 3 million. In addition it took 16 months after the event before that was even allowed to take place.
anyone know what has been spent on Benghazi hearings thus far?
ZX86
(1,428 posts)Bush courageously closed the barn doors after all the horses had run away and kept us from losing horses.
Human101948
(3,457 posts)Baaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaa!!!!!
AlbertCat
(17,505 posts)Well, Dubya IS afraid of horses, after all.
He did have a brush ranch for a while tho'.
Politicalboi
(15,189 posts)Courageously EVER. That goes for their whole shit pile family.
Ford_Prefect
(7,894 posts)Think about that.
jaxind
(1,074 posts)Love the conversation between Maher/Matthews and Pataki, but Maher and Matthews missed saying something that would have been a great point to make! When Pataki said the country came together after 9/11 that's because even though it happened during a republican's watch, the democrats still chose to come together! Do you think if 9/11 had happened under a democratic watch, the country would have come together??! No - because the republicans wouldn't have allowed it! They'd be spewing their venom all over us like they did with Benghazi!
malaise
(268,955 posts)Baitball Blogger
(46,702 posts)impeach the president, if 9/11 occurred with a Democrat in the executive office.
I just don't get why high ranking Democrats haven't figured out that Republicans are all about winning. They don't really have any true principles or high ethical standards to hang a hat on. Whatever core principles they claim to have in public, breaks down as a marketing ploy when you examine it closely.
The winner gets the spoils, the winner gets to rewrite history. That's what they're all about. And, as long as they have the support of their constituents, they get to live in this bubble.
thesquanderer
(11,986 posts)Clinton kept us safe from that threat after that. Then Bush came in and dropped the ball.
What we didnt know is what happened in between the briefing and the fishing, and now Suskind is here to tell us. Bush listened to the briefing, Suskind says, then told the CIA briefer: All right. Youve covered your ass, now.
http://www.salon.com/2006/06/20/911pdb/
oberliner
(58,724 posts)Yet Bush is the one that "kept as safe" and Obama is the one who is "weak on terrorism".
Mind-boggling.
Enthusiast
(50,983 posts)LW1977
(1,234 posts)Gore would've heeded the pre-9/11 warnings and it wouldn't have happened.
Enthusiast
(50,983 posts)And that would have been a problem for the PNAC that wanted a new Pearl Harbor. Hence the stolen election.
oberliner
(58,724 posts)Heeding the warnings would've entailed what exactly?
DavidDvorkin
(19,474 posts)in a report he handed over to Cheney. Who said that he'd take care of it and then did nothing.
dougolat
(716 posts)like Bush/Cheney did all spring of 2001.
How about NOT having those operatives interfering with intelligence agency operations, like they did with Able Danger (to name one).
How about NOT rescheduling three month's worth recurring of war-games to all occur simultaneously in early September 2001.
How about NOT deporting the 100-plus spies in June 2001 before finding out what they were up to.
How about NOT altering the procedures and protocols for hi-jacks and shoot-downs in May 2001.
How about NOT starting the mobilization for ME action in July & August 2001.
And how about NOT abandoning Clinton's anti-terrorist activities?
WinkyDink
(51,311 posts)Marr
(20,317 posts)I've literally seen multiple Republicans make that defense of Bush while simultaneously blaming Clinton for the first World Trade Center attack, when he had been president for ONE MONTH.
These are people with zero regard for consistency or facts.
leveymg
(36,418 posts)hoping to score partisan points while covering the asses of the CIA operators who completely fucked up and their foreign "friends" who turned out to be not so friendly.
Like everything else the GOP does, they likely would have fucked that up, too.